Two Islamic scholars have told the BBC that a sermon delivered at a mosque in Manchester, where suicide bomber Salman Abedi worshipped, called "for armed jihad."
The BBC has obtained the recording of Friday prayers at Didsbury mosque in December 2016, six months before Abedi killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert.
The preacher denies calling for armed jihad or ever preaching radical Islam.

like who are these people? justice for Palestine... deary me... the loony left out in force as always at the labour conference .... still hating jews and they wonder why they can't win an election Corbyn has taken them back to the 70's ... hope it continues

i just saw a free speech for Palestine on one of those flags seriously do these people know anything about Palestine? or does it fit in with their own views... i think i know the answer to that. Oh and yeah a gay man is free to say he is gay but more than likely he'll be thrown of a building that is modern day Palestine for you. And the irony is they need to escape to Isreal to enjoy the freedom we do.

I'm sure that most of you know that Tommy Robinson appeared at the Old Bailey last week and the case was adjourned until October. A few days prior to that he agreed to an interview with Sky news. Now that interview was interesting for a number of reasons - one being that it was a really good interview - i mean the full interview not the edited piece that Sky put together. This is why I have total respect for him, it is very easy to edit what we say or videos to suit our own agenda to make us look good. It is easy to put together and package at a later date so you can hide things that you might have said that you wish you hadn’t, just so you can put out your own spin. It happens all the time in politics and in the entertainment industry. What Tommy Robinson does is records everything and puts it online. There are a number of interviews he has done where he has recorded the interview on his phone. That way he does not need to worry that they might try and lie or create a story, because that is what they try and do all the time.

I stopped watching the national news on tv years ago, your 6pm, 10pm on BBC and ITV and SKY. I stopped because they manipulate the news to fit an agenda. It is blatant at times. What also sickens me is the way they play on a disaster, play on peoples emotions and try and influence people on an emotional level. That is not their job, their job is to report the news, not to influence public opinion, not to put their political agenda on things. But they do it all the time, what makes me laugh is that people only complain when they see it against something they believe in, then they jump up and down and say how biased the media are but when it suits their agenda, that is okay and they retweet quotes and video clips and put stuff on their Facebook page. That is a laugh in itself, the way some people jumped up and down and said what a disgrace it was that Trump won the election because target adds on Facebook. Yet no mention that Obama had done the exact same thing and the media had put out that he was the first president to target social media users but i digress. that is an example of when it suits it is okay, when it doesn’t jump up and down and make a noise and call the media biased. And to make is even more laughable they are the people who are still using Facebook.

Anyway back to what I was talking about. The sky news interview with Tommy Robinson - So they did this interview last week this was before the court apperance. The interview lasted for 1 hour and 15 minutes, they edited it down to just over 9 minutes.. what they didn’t know was the interview was being recorded without their knowledge.

So they put out their edited piece with the headline

“Tommy Robinson has told Sky News he does not care whether his message "incites fear" of Muslims as long as it "prevents children from getting raped".

This is a blatant lie. He never said that but Sky edited the interview to make it look like he said that.

This is how they edited the interview to shut there agenda. They have been caught in a lie and if it wasn't for the fact that the full interview was recorded they would have conned the public again. But they got caught out.

I just want to say, this is not only happening to Tommy Robinson, this is happening all the time to many people. The media are no longer reporting the news they are creating it. But you will still get people influence by the mainstream media and discuss a news report and accept it at face value. That is the worrying aspect.

.... I don't know if any of you know but there was an event organised by the Democratic Football Lads’ Alliance (DFLA) in London on Saturday. As usual this has been reported in the mainstream media as a Far right march. The Guardian has the usual left wing bias report but what made me laugh is in this report they include a photo of a group of DFLA and one of the guys is clearly black. I guess he is a right wing nazi as well

This is a live stream that a guy did on the day and he was part of the DFLA and guess what he's black as well

Now this is another video of a Police officer saying it was a far right EDL march. He clearly knows it is not the EDL. He would have been briefed on what event was taking place. But lets brand them all as far right.

i'm sure some of you will know that today the reporting restrictions have been lifted on the Huddersfield grooming gang convictions... yes the one that Tommy Robinson was talking about outside court and was arrested. The media can now report the outcome. The 20 men convicted have received a total of 221 years for what they did. These verdicts were in months ago.

What the media are not reporting is Sajid Hussain went on the run from the trial and was sentenced to 17 years in his absence. The judge, yes the same judge that put Tommy Robinson in prison with a 13 month sentence within a few hours of his arrest let these scum back on the streets. He gave the all bail. Can you believe that. So Sajid Hussain who was convicted of raping one of the victims when she was just 14 years old has fled to Pakistan and very little chance of getting him back. That is real justice isn't it. That really is protecting the public. How the hell were they allowed bail.

I'm not surprised they were allowed bail, innocent till proven guilty and all that.

It's a major failing, presumably of border control, if someone's able to flee whilst on bail though. I agree with the sentiment, it's a tough blow for any of his victims to see him escape justice. I'd imagine he's life wherever he is is anything but rosy, mind.

This is nothing that we don't already know but someone coming out and saying what he heard just confirms the way that the media spin a story to suit their own agenda.

EXPOSED: What biased British journalists said about Tommy Robinson when they thought no one was listening

By: Andrew Lawton

October 23, 2018

Before he walked into the Old Bailey for what was supposed to be a contempt of court hearing, Tommy Robinson said the media were the “enemy of the people.”

It was a line that got uproarious applause from the growing crowd of supporters.

I was inside at the time, with a front row seat to how some members of the press talk about Robinson when they think everyone agrees with them.

To be clear, and as I wrote Sunday, my working visit to the United Kingdom this week is out of a commitment to facts and fairness, not a support for Tommy Robinson. That open-mindedness wasn’t shared by at least two members of the media covering the case.

While I was preparing my own coverage before the judge’s arrival, two reporters were conversing behind me.

Both reporters—a man and a woman—were from the Press Association (PA), a British wire service. They aren’t columnists, but news reporters whose work fills the pages of publications across the United Kingdom.

I would normally not share details of private conservations—especially those in which I was not a part. In this case, the conversation was taking place surrounded by people, with no attempt to be discrete. The reporters just assumed everyone around them shared their worldview.

They mocked and chuckled at the “enemy of the people” comment, even asking a couple of arriving journalists from other outlets if they knew they were enemies of Britons.

Over the next few minutes, the bias became even more apparent.

The male reporter had seen commentator Ezra Levant outside and remarked to his colleague that Levant had apparently broken an unspecified law.

“He needs to be arrested,” he said in a markedly non-jovial tone. “He’s whipped up hate.”

The reporter didn’t extrapolate and his colleague didn’t respond.

Moments later, the female reporter said there was no ambiguity about Robinson’s guilt.

“He is in contempt of court,” she said. “There’s not really any doubt.”

Of course, when the presiding judge made the decision to refer the case to the attorney general, it was because he thought there actually was enough doubt and complexity to warrant a fuller hearing.

As the two reporters discussed the size of the crowd outside, they openly agreed to downplay it.

One of the reporters had been told by a member of the law enforcement team that there were at that point 1,500 people outside.

After some banter, the PA reporters agreed they would say “hundreds.” The reason was to not “give it credit,” the female said.

These quotes are direct and were transcribed either while they were being uttered or seconds later. They also didn’t come to be secondhand—I heard them myself.

A Press Association spokesperson said they are “inaccurate” and “misheard.”

“The Press Association is held to the highest standards on all aspects of its journalism by customers across the UK and the world. Fairness and accuracy are the cornerstones of PA reporting, and our coverage of the Tommy Robinson case today is another example of these standards,” it said. “We decline to comment further on inaccurate and misleading accusations based on fragments of misheard, private conversations.”

Members of the media aren’t allowed to record court proceedings, so all I have to go on is my word. But a recording does exist. The courtroom’s official recording device had been turned on, so I will be working to get a copy of that audio.

There was a lot of hostility towards the media at the rally. One man, thinking I was a mainstream media reporter, dumped a bottle of water on me (and my laptop bag) while calling me “scum.” There’s no excuse for that conduct, regardless of intended target.

When I was filming the rally after the court appearance, one of the speakers (with whom I had shared my Press Association story) handed me the microphone and asked me to share it with the crowd.

Having never turned down a microphone in my life, I read the quotes to the attendees, who chanted about their disgust with the media. Some were downright nasty. While I understand the frustration, I don’t like painting an industry with one brush. Those who are letting their agendas get in the way of their coverage need to do better.

why is this not making headlines... why are the mainstream media not reporting on this ...this was from the then Labour government..absolutely shocking

“THE ‘INFORMED CHOICES’ OF YOUNG GIRLS”
By Chauncey Tinker - November 7, 2018

Nazir Afzal is a former Chief Prosecutor for North West England. He was interviewed very briefly on the Radio 4 PM programme on 19th October. In the interview he made a quite astonishing claim which does not seem to have received the publicity it deserves so we thought it worth publicizing here. He said (@34minutes):

“You may not know this, but … back in 2008 the Home office sent a circular to all police forces in the country saying “as far as these young girls who are being exploited in towns and cities, we believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour and therefore it is not for you police officers to get involved in.”

Although we do not have the full text of the circular, this description seems to strongly suggest that it was a blanket instruction which did not contain any reference to the girls’ ages. If so this is direct evidence of the UK government of that time at the very least condoning statutory rape of children and really giving the green light to the police to ignore far worse crimes. In other words, police inaction in these cases was a deliberate policy and the instruction came directly from the then Labour government.

Nazir Afzal further wrote an article in the ibtimes in which he adds more detail:

Three Girls: I prosecuted the Rochdale child grooming gang – it wasn’t about race

Quote:

The term “child prostitute” was used extensively to describe them and it should be noted both that the Home Office in a circular to police in 2008 used that term and spoke of girls making an “informed choice” to engage in this behaviour.

The Home Secretary at that time was Labour’s Jacqui Smith. The next year (2009) saw Smith embroiled in an expenses scandal (her expenses included claims for a second home and a phone bill with pay to view charges for two pornographic films) and her departure from that ministerial role. Smith later bemoaned the fact that she had had no training for the ministerial role.